WASHINGTON, DC -- The U.S.-led military strike on Yugoslavia is
an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation, a potential Vietnam-style
morass for American ground troops, and a dangerous expansion of the
U.S. government's "perpetual war for perpetual peace" foreign policy,
the Libertarian Party said today.

"This is not our war," said the party's national chairman,
David Bergland. "No matter how tragic the civil war in Yugoslavia is,
the security of the United States is not at stake. We should not be
involved in this conflict."

On Wednesday, American-led NATO forces attacked Yugoslavia with
B-2 Stealth bombers, Cruise missiles, warships, and submarines. The
stated goal: To "degrade" Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic's
ability to wage a civil war against the breakaway Kosovo province.

In justifying the attack, the Clinton Administration said that
President Milosevic was behaving like Adolf Hitler, and was committing
genocide and "ethnic cleansing" against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.

But the Libertarian Party said that ending a foreign civil
war -- however noble the rhetoric justifying it -- is no excuse for
getting the United States involved in another distant conflict.

"The job of our military is to protect the United States; not
play kingmaker or nation-builder to the world," said Bergland. "There
is no legitimate reason why we should be involved in military
operations in the Balkans -- a region notorious for bloody ethnic,
religious, and territorial squabbles for over 600 years.

"Yes, the war in the Balkans is a tragedy. But that does not
justify spilling one drop of American blood or spending one dollar of
American taxpayers' money."

In addition, the military strike is dangerous and alarming
because it opens the floodgates to unlimited foreign intervention by
the U.S. government, said Bergland.

"Aside from a few token claims that our security is at stake,
the Clinton Administration is primarily justifying this attack on moral
grounds -- arguing that we have a moral obligation to stop one
particular group of foreigners from killing another group of
foreigners. However, that argument writes a blank check on our
military, and on the American taxpayers who fund it."

For example, noted Bergland, Kosovo is just one of a dozen
internal conflicts raging around the world.

"More than 37,000 Kurds have been killed in Turkey over the
past decade in that civil war. Russia just finished a bloody military
action against rebels in Chechnya. Sri Lanka continues to battle Tamil
secessionists. More than 4,000 people have died in the last month in
the Sierra Leone civil war. A low-intensity civil conflict has been
raging in Northern Ireland for most of the past 30 years. India is busy
suppressing supporters of Kashmir independence," he said.

"Given the endless number of conflicts around the globe -- all
of which involve innocent people tragically being killed -- where do we
stop? Will the United States move into an eternal war footing, fighting
a perpetual war for an increasingly elusive peace?"

Even worse, the military strike against Yugoslavia represents
an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation by NATO -- and marks the
"end of NATO's innocence" as a defensive force, said Bergland.

"Separate from the debate about whether NATO was genuinely
needed for the defense of the United States, you must grant that NATO
has an impressive 50-year track record as a purely defensive alliance,"
he said.

"That's all over now. With the attack on Yugoslavia, NATO has
launched its first unprovoked military aggression against a sovereign
nation. The transition of NATO from peace-keeper to war-maker is
complete."

The attack on Yugoslavia is also unconstitutional, since it is
a blatant act of war against a sovereign nation without formal
Congressional authorization, said Bergland.

"Even the Clinton Administration acknowledges that bombing a
sovereign nation qualifies as an act of war, which should, according to
the U.S Constitution, require a declaration of war by Congress," he
said. "However, the U.S. government justifies its action because
genocide is allegedly occurring, and because no declaration of war was
required for U.S. military intervention in Bosnia, Somalia, or Iraq.

"So, past foreign intervention is used as a justification for
current foreign intervention -- with the definition of 'war' becoming
ever more murky, and the Constitution slipping into irrelevance. That's
a tragedy, because a government unfettered by any Constitutional
limitations poses a greater danger to Americans than a civil war in an
obscure Balkan province."

Finally, the attack on Yugoslavia has no "end game" -- no
clearly articulated plan for the United States to disengage from the
conflict, said Bergland.

"This conflict could very easily turn into a Balkan Vietnam,"
he said. "Whether or not we intervene, the Kosovo conflict could spiral
into a regional war. How long is the U.S. government willing to stay
involved in a Balkan war? How much money is it willing to spend? How
many American lives it is willing to waste?

"Just look at Bosnia: Our one-year peacekeeping mission has
turned into a three-year nation-building mission, with no end in sight.
The cost has ballooned to $20 billion, with no end in sight. Look at
Haiti: Four years later, American peace-keeping troops are still in
that nation, with no end in sight. Or look at Iraq: Eight years later,
we're still fighting that war, with no end in sight.

"Now, President Clinton is prepared to deploy another 4,000
American troops to Kosovo, with no end in sight.

"We should stop this foolishness. We don't need another Bosnia.
We don't need another Haiti. We don't need another Iraq. And we
certainly don't need another Vietnam. That's why the Libertarian Party
urges: End the attack on Yugoslavia. Bring our troops home," he said.

"Americans deserve peace. And we're not going to achieve that
goal by recklessly intervening in every conflict around the globe, with
the goal of bombing our way to peace."

Answers

Yes, I oppose this ongoing tragedy that we have jumped into with both feet. Yes, there are people there that need help. There are people all over the world that need help. But this is none of our business. Why are we always poking our nose in their business. We are doing a fine job of provoking Russia.

The Balkans have been been fighting for hundreds of years, so has the Mideast, so has Northern Ireland. There are 26 wars, or "police actions" or whatever you want to call them going on at the present. Haven't we learned anything from Viet Nam? Why are we trying to be Nanny of the World?

You mean there's no oil in Kosovo? We have so many new toys
(weapons) to try out, we need a little non-nuclear civil war to stick
our noses into. Just a practice run for China/Tiawan, North/South
Korea II or maybe we can back small former Solviet republics in there
quests for freedom?

I am so enraged at what's been going on that I no longer consider
myself a supporter of this government. Sometimes I wonder if
secession is the only answer to an aloof oligarchy of people who are
obsessed with power and control. They are not even elected by a
majority of our population. (Of the fraction who register to vote,
only a fraction even bother to show up at the polls.) These oligarchs
have betrayed each one of the great ideals which were beginning to
make this a great country--all for the sake of financial, sexual, or
sheer egotistical gratification. They have beaten down the American
spirit into a unfeeling, unthinking, amoral consumption machine.

NATO, please come in and help my state throw off the yoke of Uncle
Sam!!

This is treasonous talk so I will shut up and go back to sleep and
keep being brainwashed by CNN and the like. No, on second thought,
maybe there is a ghost of a chance that the Libertarian party will
fare better this year. They have my vote; I still believe in the
Constitution; and perhaps this idiot madness will subside. But I
wonder how long I will be able to quench my anger with that
illusion...

can anyone say "Don't let KLA heroin distribution network get
disrupted, don't let it fall into Milosovic's hands, where it will
magnify his power immensely". These days white gold has more
geo-political significance than black gold.

Sixty years ago, the world did nothing except exchange pieces of
paper with a genocidal dictator. By the time it became apparent that
his words on pieces of paper were worthless, a world war was the only
answer and millions of soldiers died (together with many more million
victims of genocide, and civilians on both sides).

Today, another dictator who believes in military conquest and "ethnic
cleansing" (read genocide) is trying to expand. This time, the west
is (perhaps belatedly) acting against him.

It's hard to know what's right in such a situation, but always
remember: "for evil to flourish, all that is necessary is for good
men to do nothing". Should we really sit back and watch this evil
unfold, simply because we have little strategic interest in
Yugoslavia?